How is it racist, really? If 1) the definition of racism is "the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races; or discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race"; and 2) it is now common-place in Africa for tour-guides to be black Africans; and 3) it is more common that white people are customers of safari tours; then it is not prejudiced (shouldn't we be glad that Africans are getting these types of jobs which are held in high esteem, considering the training and education it takes?); it does not show how the white people are intrinsically superior to black people (since it is the African is knows all about everything on the safari and is educating the others); it is not discriminatory or abusive (it does not show the white people beating the black person or treating him as a slave or teaching kids that this is the black man's "place"). Ergo, a realistic and non-racist toy, possibly a tool to teach children how black Africans are finally getting what they deserve--high(er) paying jobs, education, etc.

**2**4****8**10**12**14**16**18**20**22**24**26**28**30**32**34**36**38**40SAHstepM to C and N

I never saw the original toy but it sounds like it looked a LOT like some family pictures I have. My grandma and aunt went on safari (one with little impact.. meant to just see animals in their natural habitat without bothering them) both are blond with blue eyes. Their tour guide was a black african. The same tour guide they used for the whole trip and the same guide my aunt used for a couple other trips too.

I understand the issue behind a black tour guide and white passengers for sure, but I also feel like it doesn't have to be seen so negatively or that children will see it as anything other than an African tour guide and a white family. I guess the original toy wouldn't make me angry or anything, I'd just want multiple family/race options.

I'm just saddened by this whole discussion. I'm not seeing a Post Racial society in this discussion. I'm seeing the black man should be happy that he lives in an inequitable society that limits him to certain jobs, revisionist history indicating that slavery in had nothing to do with race because Romans and some Irish people were slaves (In America the majority of SLAVES, not indentured servants were black, and the whole legacy of Jim Crow segregation was in direct response to slavery in America, and there is really no way to say differently), that now the original poster is racist because she "made the assumption" that the man was just a "driver", and that concerns about racism are dismissed because the particular poster can't see the "big deal". Just because you don't "get it" doesn't mean the feelings aren't valid. It reeks of privilege.

I'm sad that the people thinking this have children who are multiracial and they think this way. I wonder if they will dismiss their children's experiences because they don't understand?

I'm just saddened by this whole discussion. I'm not seeing a Post Racial society in this discussion. I'm seeing the black man should be happy that he lives in an inequitable society that limits him to certain jobs,

So, tell me again why it'd be a good thing for a white man to be a safari guide???

Also, again looking at Kenya because discussions about Africa as a monolith are belittling to the continent and Kenya happens to have safaris where you can see all the animals that come with the toy, over 60% of Kenya's GDP comes from tourism so if people didn't go on safari there it'd hurt the country badly.

Um, I don't think you should be using the term, lily-white to describe random caucasian people. That's very prejudiced and uncalled for. As far as the African safari tour guide, I have never seen an African safari tour guide that wasn't black. The people that are a part of the safari appear to be Northern European/Scandinavian.

I asked my dd what kind of toy this was, and she said the man driving was a zoologist giving a tour to zoo visitors. I guess the way this toy is perceived, depends on how skewed a person's world view is.

Africa is a huge continent and Kenya is ONE country out of many? How did we determine this man was Kenyan? Is all of Kenya's tourism exclusively dependent on Safaris? I'm not sure how your information applies to this discussion? Even if the man was Kenyan, should this Kenyan man be limited to working tourism? I know many Kenyans, none of them are in tourism, all of them black and given the history of British imperialism in Kenya, does it make it ok for their to be inequity in their society based on outdated imperialism? Seriously? Is this going to be the argument?

So, tell me again why it'd be a good thing for a white man to be a safari guide???

Also, again looking at Kenya because discussions about Africa as a monolith are belittling to the continent and Kenya happens to have safaris where you can see all the animals that come with the toy, over 60% of Kenya's GDP comes from tourism so if people didn't go on safari there it'd hurt the country badly.

How many times have you been to Africa on safari to determine all safari tour guides are black? So are you implying she is angry because she is making up racism in her head? Or you ignoring the actual racism that as existed against people of color for centuries and still continues to this day because it makes you uncomfortable.

I'm beginning to think that Mothering.com really isn't a place for women of color, but rather white women who cannot see the humanity or POV of anyone else because it makes them uncomfortable to address issues of race or their perceived or actual privilege.

I'll be unsubscribing from this thread and leaving mothering.com alone for a while. It's really sad to me that woman cannot see the humanity in each other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sublimeliving

Um, I don't think you should be using the term, lily-white to describe random caucasian people. That's very prejudiced and uncalled for. As far as the African safari tour guide, I have never seen an African safari tour guide that wasn't black. The people that are a part of the safari appear to be Northern European/Scandinavian.

I asked my dd what kind of toy this was, and she said the man driving was a zoologist giving a tour to zoo visitors. I guess the way this toy is perceived, depends on how skewed a person's world view is.

Africa is a huge continent and Kenya is ONE country out of many? How did we determine this man was Kenyan? Is all of Kenya's tourism exclusively dependent on Safaris? I'm not sure how your information applies to this discussion? Even if the man was Kenyan, should this Kenyan man be limited to working tourism? I know many Kenyans, none of them are in tourism, all of them black and given the history of British imperialism in Kenya, does it make it ok for their to be inequity in their society based on outdated imperialism? Seriously? Is this going to be the argument?

I used Kenya as an example, because Africa is a huge continent.

Instead of assuming it must be a racist toy, I decided to take a look at what might be going on in a real country with real safaris and a real population. Education is always better than prejudice.

Uganda, is another country offering lots of safaris, that has the animals pictured in the toy set. They've had an increase in wealth, but also an increase in poverty due to a lack of jobs. If we pretend that it's an Ugandan safari, we've just increased the poverty by giving some foreign white guy a Ugandan's job. But it's okay, right? I mean we can always patronize the guy who lost his job with charity.

There're safaris in other African countries, and I'm sure you could find one where working as a safari guide is a sign of disenfranchisement, but why support that sort of country even in pretend?

Or better yet, we can make the toy take place in a park in the U.S. with captured animals, with a nice safe dependable white American male to drive the truck.

I agree completely with changing the passengers to have multiple races. I think that removing the black driver does not send a positive message.

I think that all opportunities and career paths should be open to all people regardless of race. Why wasn't one of the tourists an African? Since that is the country where the safari was taking place and as stated a large proportion of the population is black. Because they are too poor? That is a huge problem- both the stereo-type and the reality. Tourism is good for economies, but not if all the money is funneled to the already wealthy people in that country. Why should a safari be an option only to foreigners?

I would be equally offended if I saw a toy here with a white driver taking asian tourists into the bush to see kangaroos and other Australian wildlife. Its offensive to the huge non-white Australian population and its offensive to Asian people who come here as tourists. It may be realistic, but its still racial stereo-typing. And its the stereo-typing that bothers me, not the toy. And we can brush it off as being unimportant and probably realistic, but that wont change things for the better in regards to racism. Just because the reality is racial segregation doesn't make it right. In the end, its just a toy, we are not going to march in protest to have it banned. But being aware of the ugly stereotypes we hope to eradicate helps us to move forward to hopefully one day reaching a point where they will no longer exist.

I hope Joates will feel welcome, we are all here because we are trying to have a better world for our children. Its just a slow change unfortunately.....

Playmobil has a very mixed lot of skin tones in its safari line. You can also buy extra people in large range of skin tone and they get mixed into whatever the adventure is quickly. The Native American family is a hot commodity in our family because they mother has a sling/papoose.

I can say I was pretty offended for both me and my husband when we were commented on as him being my guide while passing through a street... was offensive to both of us, a lot of assumptions and prejudice in just a few words of a random coment of someone we didn't know and we won't meet again, but which I obviously did not forget - one among similar other random comments we've had.

Us='mixed' couple, quite different in appearance through origin, at that time no kids yet.

This is a pretty crude analogy but what would we be saying about our children playing with a toy set called "Antebellum Times." Slaves working the fields? And the happy house slave cooking in the kitchen? Totally accurate! But including these things in a TOY set normalizes them for our children. Instead of teaching them about racism and about the complex ways in which racism appears throughout history, it shows them that this is normal and fine.

Some people seem to think that because being a safari guide is a good job in terms of certain parts of Africa that this is not racist. I think that people who have studied Africa and studied the history of these things will realize that the implications of the tourist industry in Africa can be troubling and that a deeper analysis of this system (like so many other things) is worthy of further thought or discussion before we simply foist these things on our children without thinking about these things.

Please people stop commenting about how Black African people shoudl be thankful for any job. Its racist. And repetitive.

Exactly. Poverty is a Problem, created by colonialism and perpetuated through neocolonialism. One of the most important tools of colonialism is raising children "back home" in Europe or America or wherever, to see the oppressed as non-people, or less-of-people, than them. The oppressed are showcased with the animals as exotic specimens to wonder at. Otherwise, too many people would seriously object to colonialism, because the majority are decent people who would never dream of kicking say, their neighbors, off their land to build a mine. Toys like that safari set have a long history of supporting racism and oppression.